Well...no. Because as others have said, it's not a staff review. It doesn't fit Metacritics standard for being posted on the site.

Edit: I should point out that I don't actually give a flying fuck about the Metacritic score of Uncharted 4. This is, however, quite and interesting situation.

Well because of the Metacritic people are taking it seriously. If the review wasnt on MC, then nobody would make a petition. People who doesnt take MC seriously doesnt make petitions to take reviews off it.

IGN and other sites outsource their reviews all the time.

That question was rhetorical, dude. Keep up.

Your point was that there is an issue with media sites posting bad reviews to drive traffic, which is a sentiment based on nothing. Your bolded, underlines quote was a proposed solution to a problem you assume exists based on nothing. It doesn't matter what it means. It's based on nothing. That was my point. Who are you to decide if it was done to increase traffic? Why would "the profession of journalism" have to deal with a problem that likely exists exclusively in your imagination.

I know this isn't about reviews. That last sentence was a tangent, which is why it was separated from the preceding paragraph.

The reason for the petition is because:

As I stated, developers pay are affected by it and as such they need to be consistent with their polocies.

There was no reasonable explination given as to why they deviated from their polocies for this review/satire/whatever.

In the end, there isn't anything wrong with the article itself... this is all about metacritics handeling.  I said I support the petition on the grounds that it is correct, but I think they should leave the score as a reminder that this is a botched system form the get go and the community at large needs to stop giving it so much attention.   If we are talking about MC doing the right thing they of couse they will take it down.  But its not about that for them obviously.  If they don't follow their own standard guidelines, then maybe PUBLISHERS should stop basing developer bonuses off of MC.

Imagine if you were a developer and you got robbed because MC system is broken and people were going out of their way to include unscored reviews. 

This guy wen out of his way to find a negative review and then he went out of his way to get a bad score for it... a score that wasn't given to the article itself which really shouldn't happen.  Combine that with him being an AP writter himself and suddenly you have a huge cluster fuck of a problem.    THAT is why the petition esists and the petition isn't wrong. 

Honestly think the only reason it get a 4 outta 10, is for clickbait.

Well you cant review a game with all that shit hanging over you. Its amazing that any game gets made at all. Many people work hard and spends alot of their time working on a game. You can only write about what you think of the game itself. That guy gave it a 4/10 because thats what he believes it deserve. I dont agree with him, but thats another story.

MC obviously has more information than we do on the case. They said WP provided them with a score, so I believe them. Why would they lie? WP had two people review the game and they chose one to send to MC. I dont know if they did it to get more clicks or if they just changed their policies.

No, it's not rhetorical, because it has an answer and I gave it.  Troy Baker.   You may have meant it rhetorically, but, you may not have known that Troy Baker signed the petition, so, it's of no consequence.  

Now, I'm not really sure why it matters who I am.  Some of the smallest and most unimportant people have changed the course of history.  So, attacking my bona fides doesn't really make much sense.  Nevermind that I highly doubt you'd be capable of asking this question of Troy Baker, is he close enough to the industry for his concern to register w/ you?  Ok, maybe not Troy, how about the original team lead of World of Warcraft, Mark Kern?  He's voiced concern plenty of times regarding the state of Games Journalism/reviews?  Is he enough of a name for you to take seriously?  Nevermind that if you look at the games in question, FH2, and here UC4, you'll notice that there's literally _1_ negative review for both games (20 and 40 respectively), whereas the meta is 86 and 93 respectively.  Not much of a stretch to theorize from there.  Granted, it's not proof, then again, you have nothing.

Btw, before you respond, you're going to need to put together your Bona Fides and prove that your opinion is equal to that of Baker and Kern.  Hate to do it, but you set these rules.  Have to be fair.

I understand where you are coming from and I agree with you but there are a few details I want to clear up:

The guy didn't give it a 4/10.  MC said they got they reaced out to WP to get the score.    WP didn't submit anything.  Thats not how Metacritic works according to the quy on twitter.  He said they go to sites and look for staff reviews.  Articles aren't submitted.  He said that he didn't accept the 10/10 because it wasn't a staff review (even though the Comic Rifts article wasn't staff reviewed either).   So yes they are lying about something or they are blatently making up rules as they go.  

The idea that he would reach out to WP to get a score doesn't make sense because it wasn't WP's review anyway nor was the 10/10 AP review.  Thats the crux of the controversey.  WP can't give a score because it isn't their's to score.  Only the reviewer himself could give a score.  The whole thing is a scam and still I think we need to keep the score to remind everyone not to trust MC like they are infalible. 

I won't sign simply because I think online petitions are nonsense. That being said, the writer of that article clearly went in with great bias. Which is sad because WaPo isn't some backwoods online publication. If he'd have gone 7 or 8 I'd have lent some merit to his review. But when your review says you're playing a completely different game than the game the other 40 reviewers have played it's clear you have an agenda.